Sunday, 2 September 2012

The Sultan of Selangor has questioned the state’s decision to invite
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to grace an official National Day celebration
last week, a Malay daily reported today as controversy grows over the
Pakatan Rakyat (PR) government’s treatment of the palace.

“His Royal Highness the Sultan finds it strange that in such a
programme, Anwar, who is not part of the state government’s top
leadership, was the guest-of-honour.
“The PKR Opposition Leader also does not hold any official portfolio,
except as the appointed State Economic Adviser,” Datuk Mohamad Munir
Bani, who is private secretary to Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah, was
reported by Sinar Harian as saying.

“The convention is that if His Royal Highness is unable to attend the
state government’s official programmes, the Mentri Besar replaces the
Sultan to give speeches and so on. But, why was Anwar invited and gave a
speech, when this was an official programme, not a political
programme?” the palace official told the Malay daily.

Mohamad was previously reported as saying that the Selangor Sultan was not invited or informed of the state-level celebrations.

“Maybe the people will wonder why in an official programme, the
Sultan did not appear, but Anwar became the guest of honor and came
forward to speak,” he was quoted as saying.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had yesterday castigated the
PR-led Selangor government for shutting out the state Ruler from its
official National Day celebrations at Dataran Shah Alam last Thursday,
suggesting that it placed greater importance on Anwar who was only an economic adviser than the monarch.

“The question of disrespecting the Selangor Sultan does not surprise
us... they show more respect to their economic adviser who has no locus
standi,” he told reporters at the Selangor Umno Adilfitri celebration in
Sungai Buloh yesterday as he scoffed at his political nemesis’
specially-created position within the state government.

“His Royal Highness is the symbol to the state that we must respect,”
he said, adding that the Selangor Sultan was a symbol of the state’s
sovereignty and unity and should be accorded the highest level of
respect.
Najib, who is also Umno president, had warned that there the
PKR-DAP-PAS opposition bloc would change many things, including the
royal institution should it succeed in taking power at the next general
elections due soon.

Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim has deflected criticism
saying the state countdown to the country’s 55th Independence Day last
Thursday at Dataran Shah Alam was not politically-motivated.
“This celebration has never been a politically-motivated celebration
and has been carried out by government officials from the state
secretariat office for several years,” Khalid, who is also the PKR
treasurer, was quoted as saying in today’s New Sunday Times.

Khalid reportedly said that the state had complied with the usual practices in organising such an event.
The weekend edition of the Umno-linked English daily also reported
Khalid saying that State Secretary Datuk Mohamad Khusrin Munawi would
explain the circumstances in a report.

The Selangor government today denied it had intentionally shut out
Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah from its official National Day
celebrations last week, and pointed out that the state ruler did not
traditionally attend the event and this has been the practice since the
previous Barisan Nasional (BN) administration.

The state leadership — now under Pakatan Rakyat (PR) control — was
put on the backfoot today after the Selangor Ruler reportedly questioned
its decision to invite Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to
grace the event despite the fact that he holds no official position in
the government, pointing to a widening rift with the palace.

Faekah Husin, who is political secretary to Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim , defended the state's decision as the norm for the past four years.

“It has been the tradition for the last four years that His Royal
Highness the Sultan is not invited and (does not) attend the Merdeka day
celebrations programme.

“His Royal Highness is only invited to the yasin and tahlil ceremony
at state mosque, Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah Mosque,” she told The Malaysian Insider when contacted.

She said it had always been the case even when the state was under BN administration. '

She was responding to Malay daily, Sinar Harian’s front page
news report today, that the Selangor Sultan had questioned the state’s
decision to invite Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to grace the state’s
official National Day celebrations last Thursday night.

“The convention is that if His Royal Highness is unable to attend the
state government’s official programmes, the Mentri Besar replaces the
Sultan to give speeches and so on. But, why was Anwar invited to give a
speech, when this was an official programme, not a political programme?”
Datuk Mohamad Munir Bani, who is private secretary to the Selangor
Sultan told Sinar.

The Sultan’s private secretary was also previously reported as saying
that the Selangor Sultan was not invited or informed of the state-level
celebrations.

Faekah said she was confident that the committee organising the
event, led by State Secretary Datuk Khusrin Munawi, had conducted checks
on protocol when deciding the invitation list.

“We believe Datuk Khusrin has seen the protocol list for invitations
of previous years including celebrations during the time of BN’s rule
(in Selangor).

“But if this year, His Royal Highness had the intention to attend the
Merdeka eve celebrations, His Royal Highness’ private secretary Datuk
Mohamad Munir Bani has to advise us, but there was no advice regarding
that matter from him,” she said.

She also expressed regret at Munir’s statement to the media that
appeared to have been played up by certain parties to suggest the
Selangor PR government was attempting to diminish the Sultan’s role.
“Datuk Khusrin himself has guaranteed that Datuk Munir will explain,
but I don’t understand why his (Munir’s) statement in the media is very
different.”

“When it’s related to the Sultan and the palace, the state government is very careful,” she said.
A text message the state secretary had sent Faekah — made available to The Malaysian Insider — appeared to corroborate her remarks.

In the message, Khusrin had purportedly referred to the issue as an attempt by Umno-owned Malay paper Utusan Malaysia
to stir up public sentiment against the state government. He had also
purportedly said he would clarify the matter with the Sultan’s private
secretary.

Faekah also said the state government is confident that the Sultan of
Selangor will view the matter from a broader perspective despite
allegations by certain parties criticising the state for its alleged
disrespect to the royal institution.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had yesterday castigated the
PR-led Selangor government for shutting out the State Ruler from its
official National Day celebrations at Dataran Shah Alam last Thursday,
suggesting that it placed greater importance on Anwar, who was only an
economic adviser, than the monarch.

“The question of disrespecting the Selangor Sultan does not surprise
us... they show more respect to their economic adviser who has no locus standi,”
he told reporters at the Selangor Umno Adilfitri celebration in Sungai
Buloh yesterday as he scoffed at his political nemesis’
specially-created position within the state government.

“I believe His Royal Highness is wise enough to view this matter in a broader way.”

“No one wants to ignore the Sultan; what more if His Royal Highness
himself has intentions to attend the Merdeka eve night (celebrations),”
she said, adding that “but if that is true, the intention did not reach
us.”
“If it was informed (to us), I am confident that the Merdeka
celebrations will be more joyous with the presence of His Royal
Highness, the Sultan,” Faekah said.

MERDEKA: Can
UMNO’s claim that they fought for the country’s independence stand the
test of time?

The veracity of this claim is now shrouded with doubt.

A
book in bahasa, entitled Anak Merdeka, written by Haji Salleh
Majid and published in 1991, exposed the fallacy of this claim. The
author was no politician but an ordinary man who lived to witness the
political development of this country evolving from the 1940s to the day
of Merdeka.

Early attempts to gain independence

Early
attempts to achieve independence were mostly unrecorded. For example,
in the early 1940s and before the Japanese occupation of Malaya, Ishak
Haji Mohammed (commonly known as Pak Sako), together with an Indonesian
delegation, surreptitiously went to Japan soliciting Japanese help to
fight for the independence of their respective countries. This was
followed by Soekarno meeting Dr Burhanuddin Al-Helmy (right)
to plan strategies for both countries’ independence. Though both
attempts failed for various reasons, the seeds of independence had been
sowed long before the existence of UMNO.

Ishak Haji Mohamad’s
secret trip to Japan was risky business, inviting prosecution for
treason, punishable by death, but such was the dexterity of this pure
nationalist. Though he was in the colonial civil service at that time,
his patriotism and love for the country was never sacrificed to the
colonial masters he served. In fact it was while in Japan that the name
Sako was begotten. The Japanese found it difficult to spell and
pronounce his name Ishak, so they called him Isako. Later it became his
pen name, Pak Sako.Indonesia’s independence

The
independence of Indonesia on 17 August 1945 triggered fire in the
hearts of Malays of Indonesian descent. After all, Indonesia was the
“motherland”, separated only by the narrow Straits of Malacca. Both
were Malay lands; and if one could gain independence, why not the
other? Furthermore, an independent Indonesia could provide moral and
material help to Malays in the struggle for independence. Thus, begun
the dawn of Merdeka.

Formation of PKMM

It
was not until early 1946 that Malaya’s first independent movement was
formed. It was a political party called Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya
(PKMM). Its founder members were Malays of Indonesian descent, notable
among them were Ahmad Boestamam and Musa Ahmad. The party published its
first newspaper called Suara Rakayt at Hale Street, Ipoh. The contents
were one hundred per cent political. In no time, PKMM opened branches
all over the country with its headquarters at 2 Batu Road (now Jalan
Tuanku Abdul Rahman) Kuala Lumpur. It did not take long for Pak Sako
and Dr Burhanuddin Al-Helmy to join the party.

“Merdeka!” was the
greeting of party members whenever they met. It was said in a spirited
voice with clenched fist brought to the chest. Anytime and anywhere
they met, the greeting was “Merdeka!”

Formation of UMNO

The
United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) was formed in June 1946, six
months after the formation of PKMM. It was established with the sole
objective of opposing the proposed Malayan Union which relegated the
powers of the Malayan Rulers to the British Residents. UMNO was not an
independence movement. In fact, it vehemently opposed independence as
the leaders were mostly colonial civil servants who had sold their lives
and soul to their colonial masters. Not only was UMNO opposed to
independence, the word “Merdeka”was taboo to them. UMNO’s greeting was
“hidup Melayu!”

Pic: UMNO's formation at Istana Johor, 1946

The other reason UMNO opposed independence was that the Malays were
poor and uneducated; left to themselves, Malaya would be a failed state.

The
PKMM, on the other hand, thought otherwise. The party wanted
independence first; then there would be ample opportunity to educate the
Malays as the country was rich in natural resources, and it would not
be a failed state. These opposing positions divided the two parties and
led to enmity.PKMM and the labour movement

Enhanced
by its committed leaders, the PKMM was a symbol of solidarity. The
spirit within party members raged like wildfire. Branches and bureaus
were established. Apart from the youth and women’s wings, labour,
agriculture and religious bureaus were established. The labour bureau
was the most active and most successful political agitator. Through it,
the PKMM penetrated the Malayan labour movement, which was very
responsive to the former’s presence as the living conditions of the
labourers at that time were deplorable. In fact, the presence of the
PKMM was welcomed and long awaited.

Incidentally, the Malayan
labour movement had affiliated itself with the world labour movement,
the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), whose headquarters was in
Paris, and not with the American-controlled International Labour
Organisation (ILO), whose headquarters was in New York. The WFTU was
leftist inclined, and with the Malayan labour movement affiliated to it,
the PKMM’s penetration into the movement heightened British suspicion
of the party.

Organised strikes

Between
1946-1948, the labour movement was so active (except in Kelantan,
Terengganu and Kedah) that intermitternt strikes almost crippled the
rubber and tin industries. The port workers of Singapore too joined in
the strikes, crippling Malaya’s major port.

As expected, the
British operative policy of divide and rule was immediately put into
action. While pretending to acknowledge the labourers’ plight, the PKMM
was declared illegal and its leaders incarcerated.

The organised
strikes did not ease with the banning of the PKMM. Day by day, British
economic interests were in jeopardy. The rubber and tin industries, the
mainstay of the British economy, faced imminent paralysis. By this
time the colonial government had sent a loud and clear message to
Whitehall. By this time, Whitehall realised that the independence of
India and Indonesia had given impetus to Malaya to free itself from the
shackles of colonial rule. This aspiration could no longer be contained
and sooner or later Malaya had to be given its independence.Independence on a silver platter

The
British had learnt that independence achieved through war not only
resulted in the loss of life and property, but left a grudge within the
beneficiary state, resulting in the nationalisation of the colonialists’
assets. This meant the British could lose everything. So the only
option was for a negotiated independence. The question then was who
would be the British protege so that their assets would be fully
protected and the expatriates could hold on to their jobs a little
longer.

With PKMM banned and its leaders incarcerated, the only organised
movement that dominated the political scene then was UMNO, which was
seen as a safe bet. Firstly, most of their leaders were British
educated and had embraced British culture and values ever since their
high school days in Britain or at the Malay College Kuala Kangsar.
Secondly, they were mostly the sons of the Malay rulers and chieftains
who had been close to the British. These people had regarded the
British as their icons and mentors and viewed them as their savoir.UMNO, the opportunist

UMNO
was quick to seize the opportunity. With its adversary, the PKMM
banned and driven into oblivion, UMNO took over where the PKMM had left
off. From an anti-Malayan Union organi-sation, it suddenly assumed the
role of a force fighting for independence. The British were very
comfortable with UMNO’s new role, and negotiations for independence took
off.

The negotiations that followed were mainly technical and
focussed on two major issues: to prepare the country’s constitution and
to agree on the date of the declaration of independence. A body was
formed, headed by Lord Reid, to look into a constitution and the date of
independence was agreed as 31 August 1957. For political exigency,
UMNO would have to forge an alliance with the ethnic Chinese and Indian
political parties, and hence “Perikatan” (Alliance) was formed.

Pending
full independence, Malaya was ruled by the Federal Legislative Council
consisting of appointed members representing the various races and
professions. With independence granted on a silver platter, the British
were successful in retaining the entire system and had their assets
protected. For UMNO and the Alliance, the declaration of independence
was a jubilant moment as it was achieved without shedding a drop of
blood.

Declaration of independence

On 31
August 1957, Malaya was re-reborn. As the clock struck midnight, the
Union Jack was lowered and the new Malayan flag was hoisted in front of
the clock tower opposite the Selangor Padang. The shouts of “Merdeka!” —
no less than seven times — reverberated and resounded in the air. The
shouts were led by Tuanku Abdul Rahman, who stood on a rostrum
surrounded by his Cabinet Ministers, some of whom, I observed, were
obviously drunk.

The official declaration of independence was
held at Stadium Merdeka the next morning, attended by all the Malay
Rulers, the British High Commissioner and the representatives of the
Queen (Duke of Gloucester). I was there with my father and sibling
“representing” Temerloh, Pahang.

Thus,
Malaya was born as an independent state, a member of the British
Commonwealth and member of the United Nations. It was the culmination
of a long and difficult struggle, an achievement won not by the educated
class, but by labourers, port workers and others — the downtrodden —
whose existence we hardly knew.

They were the real fighters of
Merdeka, whose actions created a landscape for independence. Those were
the people who laboured endlessly to enrich the colonial masters in
return for a pittance and who now lay in the graves unknown and
forgotten.

They were Malays, Indians, Chinese and others and they
were certainly not UMNO members. They were the unsung heroes who
sacrificed their lives and freedom for future generations, but who only
found their own freedom in the silence of their graves. It is those
people who deserve to be commemorated on 31 August every year and not
“the patriots” who hoisted the jalur gemilang on the roofs of mansions
at the prestigious addresses of Kuala Lumpur or those who flew the jalur
gemilang on the roofs of their flashy cars.

To the real patriots
and the fighters of independence, we offer them our unreserved salute.
As for UMNO, we only have this to say: “Lembu punya susu, sapi dapat nama.”

* The writer, a lawyer, is former MP for Temerloh, Pahang, and the former managing director of Harakah. This article appeared on Aliran monthly.